Skip to main content
. 2021 Sep 28;2021(9):CD009790. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD009790.pub2

Hildebrandt 2000.

Study characteristics
Methods Study design: RCT
Setting: Netherlands, healthcare
Exercise groups: 1
Comparison groups: 1
Participants Number of participants: 222 (E1 = 112, C1 = 110)
Chronic LBP duration: Not specified (not specified)
Neurological/radicular symptoms: Not specified
Mean age (years): 42
Sex (female): 49%
Interventions Exercise Group 1 (E1): Postural exercises (Cesar therapy); type = other (co‐ordination); duration = 12 weeks; dose = low; design = not specified; delivery = individual; additional intervention = not specified
Comparison Group 1 (C1): Usual care/no treatment (usual general practitioner care)
Outcomes Core outcomes reported: Global Perceived Health or Recovery (Global Perceived Health or Recovery (global improvement (recovered))
Follow‐up time periods available for syntheses: 12 weeks (short)
Notes Conflicts of interest: Not reported
Funding source: Not reported
Other: Sufficient data not available for inclusion in meta‐analyses
Risk of bias
Bias Authors' judgement Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias) Low risk Support for judgement is not available
Allocation concealment (selection bias) Low risk Support for judgement is not available
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias)
All outcomes High risk Support for judgement is not available
Blinding of care provider (performance bias) High risk Support for judgement is not available
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias)
All outcomes High risk Support for judgement is not available
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias)
All outcomes High risk Support for judgement is not available
Participants analysed in group allocated (attrition bias) Low risk Support for judgement is not available
Selective reporting (reporting bias) Unclear risk Support for judgement is not available
Groups similar at baseline (selection bias) Low risk Support for judgement is not available
Co‐interventions avoided or similar (performance bias) Low risk Support for judgement is not available
Compliance acceptable in all groups (performance bias) Low risk Support for judgement is not available
Timing of outcome assessment similar in all groups (detection bias) Unclear risk Support for judgement is not available